Pro-Hillary Media Bias

[thatfeel]

5. You are changing the subject. You stated that UPS using the Post Office for money losing routes was because I wanted to socialize the losses. And I stated no, that the Post office was ALREADY SOCIALIZING THE LOSSES since it had the money losing route before UPS got involved. UPS was smart enough to lower it's costs and it did!!! You can't blame UPS for the Post Office running routes that lose money!!

What the hell are you even saying? How did the USPS [have] the "money losing route" before UPS got involved? Yes...the USPS is a public service that delivers regular ass mail to everyone's mailbox on the same routes, every day, Monday through Saturday (with Sunday package delivery from partnerships like Amazon). The post office didn't take anything before that it didn't already have and then "socialize the loss", it was already doing what the goal of the post office was to do: deliver daily mail. On the same routes it's been going for years. And years. And years. And years. The post office isn't "running routes that lose money!!". Again, it's been running the same damn routes it does decade after decade.

In fact, the USPS is pretty much self sufficient and their revenue is up by about a billion. The only reason they could be seen to be bleeding money is because of the pre-fund mandate that's been talked about countless times in this thread.

So no, when UPS/Fedex dump packages on USPS, the USPS isn't taking anything on a route that loses money. That's ALL on UPS/Fedex. Since most people get regular mail every day save for the odd day every 4-5 weeks where they didn't get any mail in their mailbox, most packages for USPS are "on the way" or at the place they would've regularly delivered mail to anyway. This is literally common sense stuff.

UPS and Fedex are not regularly in the business of delivery normal ass mail, sure you can use them to expedite very important documents here and there but the bulk of their business is in the delivery of packages and boxes. When UPS and Fedex dump packages on USPS that's because the route for UPS OR FEDEX was seen as not profitable. It dumps the packages on the USPS that are going on routes they'd typically be going on anyway, so they don't have to increase capital spending in ways that decrease profits, e.g. on employees sorting the packages or loading them onto trucks, having the driver go to the extra address, etc. Offloading the package to the public sector service = socializing the loss. The loss was for UPS / Fedex. How you are even trying to make the claim that it's the post office's "money losing route" is hilarious.

Yeah man it's all great and stuff when a company is "smart enough" to increase profits, but it doesn't create the golden egg of efficiency you think it does and it doesn't benefit anyone but the top executives that pinch pennies wherever they can.

 

[yuppee]

the PO has never made money, so by definition, ALL their routes are "money loser" routes.

 

[yuppee]

fully gold backed currency is the only kind that has a CHANCE of retaining the same value as time passes. All others will inevitably be inflated to nothingness. This has never once failed to be the case, in all of history.

 

[Tictac]

In fact, the USPS is pretty much self sufficient

USPS lost $5,500,000,000 in 2014 (the most recent statistics available).,Operating revenue was $67.8 billion compared to $67.2 billion in 2013.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Nothing more needs be said because you haven't a clue what you are talking about. What domyounthink will happen when foreign creditors (our trade deficit is as large as our public debt) refuse to accept dollars as payment.

They can't.

 

[Tictac]

They can't.

It's happened any number of times Pee Wee.

Enjoy your blindness.

Go watch your Truther videos.

 

[EyeBRollin]

All you are saying is all saying is inflation devalues cash, which is fvcking obvious. But it's not theft. What you don't realize is slow, predictable inflation is baked into the cake of basic economics, and it is desired. The reason for it is that inflation encourages investment. Whereas, the second it becomes more profitable to just sit on your cash because the value keeps going up then we are in deflation and a deflationary spiral becomes almost unavoidable. So if nobody is spending means we are in a recession, or depression if it becomes severe.

Correct. However, devaluing the currency does not cause inflation.

Inflation is caused by energy prices. Take a look.

It is the Central Bank (Federal Reserve) that sets the target rate at 2%, and uses a combination of interest rates and account transfers to regulate the money supply to that 2% target. This is done as a response to the real cause of inflation, which is energy prices.

 

[EyeBRollin]

It's happened any number of times Pee Wee.

Enjoy your blindness.

Go watch your Truther videos.

Foreign investors can't buy U.S. denominated treasuries and then tell the U.S. to pay them in a different currency. Lmao!

 

[Tictac]

It happened to GB in 1976 laughing boy.

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.”
Stephen Hawking

Enjoy your denial.

 

[yuppee]

they can ask, but they can't MAKE us do so, and they are stupid to buy into that. No, inflation does NOT encourage investment. it encourages SPENDING, before the currency is worth even less than it is at present.

 

[yuppee]

inflation is ONLY caused by printing too much money, dumbass. prices don't rise unless there is a shortage and there's no energy shortage. What there IS, tho, is 3-4 trillion of tax $ wasted on the non productive, on the worthless war machine, on the dope war, and on the illegals.

 

[EyeBRollin]

they can ask, but they can't MAKE us do so, and they are stupid to buy into that.

Correct. Discussion over.

No, inflation does NOT encourage investment. it encourages SPENDING, before the currency is worth even less than it is at present.

It encourages both. There is no incentive to invest or spend under the converse, which is deflation. Why would I spend or invest in anything that will be worth less tomorrow?

 

[yuppee]

you worded this incorrectly. you say there's an incentive to invest and then you say there's not. which is it?

 

[EyeBRollin]

inflation is ONLY caused by printing too much money, dumbass. prices don't rise unless there is a shortage and there's no energy shortage. What there IS, tho, is 3-4 trillion of tax $ wasted on the non productive, on the worthless war machine, on the dope war, and only the illegals.

Nope, it is caused by energy prices. Read the graph. It is supply and demand, pal. There's no energy shortage because the global supply has increased due to domestic oil. Every time there was an oil shortage, inflation shoots up.

You can't speak your falsehoods into existence.

 

[yuppee]

so what? they lie, that's all. there is no less oil. the only reason it increases in "price" is the US prints too much money, the oil producers (and every else, too). knows the money is worth less and they demand more of it for their products. you have the cart before the horse, that's all.

 

[EyeBRollin]

so what? they lie, that's all. there is no less oil. the only reason it increases in "price" is the US prints too much money, the oil producers (and every else, too). knows the money is worth less and they demand more of it for their products. you have the cart before the horse, that's all.

You have it backwards. Oil is the scarce resource, not the U.S. dollar.

 

[Tictac]

Correct. Discussion over.



It encourages both. There is no incentive to invest or spend under the converse, which is deflation. Why would I spend or invest in anything that will be worth less tomorrow?

That very much depends on what is going up in value. Neither inflation nor deflation occur evenly in an economy.

 

[EyeBRollin]

That very much depends on what is going up in value. Neither inflation nor deflation occur evenly in an economy.

We're talking about general inflation and deflation in the economy. The prices of TVs coming down is not the overall trend in the economy. If it were, we would be in for trouble. Deflation in macro discourages spending and investment. There's no reason to buy anything if it will all be cheaper in the future.

 

[Tictac]

We're talking about general inflation and deflation in the economy. The prices of TVs coming down is not the overall trend in the economy. If it were, we would be in for trouble. Deflation in macro discourages spending and investment. There's no reason to buy anything if it will all be cheaper in the future.

If just said that neither inflation nor deflation occur evenly in any economy. Which words do you not understand?

'General' is what's used in macro-economic modeling which is why those models are all but useless. I will tutor you if you like.

 

[EyeBRollin]

If just said that neither inflation nor deflation occur evenly in any economy. Which words do you not understand?

'General' is what's used in macro-economic modeling which is why those models are all but useless. I will tutor you if you like.

Monetary policy takes into account the whole economy, not just the sectors you like.